Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Drug maker finances effort to require shots
Waterbury Republican-American ^ | January 31, 2007 | Associated Press

Posted on 01/31/2007 8:36:26 AM PST by Graybeard58

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 01/31/2007 8:36:26 AM PST by Graybeard58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

"Connect the dots" "Follow the money" "Good business plan (Which I guess it is)" etc...


2 posted on 01/31/2007 8:41:36 AM PST by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
"What we support are approaches that achieve high immunization rates," said Skidmore, the Merck spokeswoman. "We're talking about cervical cancer here, the second-leading cancer among women worldwide."

No. What we're talking about is Merck's corner on the market and the $$$ they stand to make by insisting that [any group] MUST have their vaccine. The commercial even tells you that 'not all' patients will be immune even if they do have the vaccine.
3 posted on 01/31/2007 8:41:49 AM PST by Froufrou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

These are the same schools that encourage homosexual experimentation. They don't care about preventing STDs.

They claim cancer is prevented (with no side effects). A medical birth control claims it clears up acne. Condoms in schools didn't end STD but it did end the argument over whether kids SHOULD be having sex and shifted the focus to "when".

The Sex Positive Agenda marches on.


4 posted on 01/31/2007 8:41:56 AM PST by weegee (No third term. Hillary Clinton's 2008 election run presents a Constitutional Crisis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: weegee
The Sex Positive Agenda marches on.

While I agree completely, I doubt that Merck cares a fig about anything except selling their product.
5 posted on 01/31/2007 8:46:32 AM PST by Froufrou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Froufrou
The commercial even tells you that 'not all' patients will be immune even if they do have the vaccine.

Have you noticed how this is said in the commercials--fast and it seems to me in a softer voice. Like they were trying to gloss over a very important fact.

6 posted on 01/31/2007 8:47:35 AM PST by Tarheel (Do you remember 9/11, do you remember the LEADERSHIP in NYC? Rudy--2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Tarheel

I have noticed. Just like announcers bark out the 'fine print' or 'possible side effects' as fast as they can.


7 posted on 01/31/2007 8:52:07 AM PST by Froufrou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Froufrou

How about car deals or dealers?

The microscopic unreadable fine print that literally flashes at the end of a car commercial when they announce the next to free rates for puchase.

Imagine if disclamers had to be said in the same rate as the slowest other spoken part of the commercial. Or there was a time to read requirement.


8 posted on 01/31/2007 9:02:16 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Froufrou; Tarheel

The fine print also says the the vaccine only protects against SOME TYPES of HPV, so annual paps and followup treatment will still be necessary. Annual paps and followup treatment already have a virtual 100% success rate in preventing death from this disease, so basically all we've gained here is a lot of $$$$ for Merck. As a Merck shareholder, I applaud their aggressiveness in pursuing the bottom line, but as a mother, I will pass on this vaccine for my daughter.


9 posted on 01/31/2007 9:02:35 AM PST by LadyNavyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory; LadyNavyVet

I went to Merck's site to read about the study. Nowhere did it state how many in the placebo group got cancer. Nowhere did it state that the control group was clear, only that the study indicated the drug as "100% effective" in preventing types 16 and 18, and "maybe" two other types of HPV.

I saw a commercial in which a female researcher says she lost her dad to [insert disease] and that's why her work is so important to her. Faux altruism apparently sells.


10 posted on 01/31/2007 9:06:41 AM PST by Froufrou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Froufrou

Merk is free to hire lobbyists to push their product and we are free to expose the fact that the main push for this unneeded sex disease vaccine is from the maker of the sex disease vaccine.


11 posted on 01/31/2007 9:07:22 AM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
I don't think the shot should be mandetory, but education about it should be taught in Health class.

I'm conservative. All three of my kids grew up to be conseratives.

My youngest daughter, who has three children, was recently diagnosed with cervical cancer. Thank Got it was found early. Amazingly, though she had been on the patch and had regular Pap tests, the original precancerous lesions were discovered during her 6 week checkup after her last child was born. Several visits and procedures later, the precancerous cells not only continued coming back but have turned into full blown cancer. She's scheduled for surgery in mid-February.

Needless to say a child, even a grown one, with a potentially deadly disease is every parent's nightmare and tanscends mere ideology.

The announcement that a vaccine might have prevented her condition came too late for her.

Don't support mandetory vaccination - what good is that going to do for a girl who grow up to become a nun?? But allow your daughers to KNOW about it, and then continue to preach abstinance. There is NO REASON why your daughters can't be made aware of the vaccine, so they can CHOOSE to have it before they marry. The show can't prevent all type of cancer, just the type induced by the virus....but getting rid of one type of threat can only be a good thing.

The cancer is not invasive yet, but everyone who experiences this automatically reaches the point of wondering will they get it all? Will it come back? None of us want to go through this, especialy if it's not preventable.

I hope we don't allow our position on this one to become dogmatized by the media to the point where some young women don't get the shot and wind up suffering from cervical cancer as a result.

12 posted on 01/31/2007 9:13:09 AM PST by cake_crumb (When "bipartisan study groups" prosecute wars, you get Another Viet Nam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory; LadyNavyVet

I'd like to know how long they wait after their studies before allowing the stuff on the market without knowing the consequences and long-term effects.

Is the FDA really doing their job? How Kosher is it to sign up people for study-related expenses to be their guinea pigs? Look what happened with Phenphen and Celebrex...


13 posted on 01/31/2007 9:13:29 AM PST by Froufrou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Froufrou

You may not remember thalidomide--what a disaster that proved to be.


14 posted on 01/31/2007 9:29:55 AM PST by Tarheel (If you can make it there, you can make it anywhere... Rudy--2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Froufrou
In the case of thalidomide the FDA did do it's job.

At the time there was a woman who was head of the FDA--she had seen some early reports from Europe re: profound defects occurring in the babies of women who took the drug. The drug maker was pushing the FDA hard to approve the drug--the director would not move and stayed with her initial decision. Unfortunately, there were a good number of cases of defects here in the US because women brought the drug back from Europe. The UK had a very large number of babies born without limbs or only portions thereof--tragic.

15 posted on 01/31/2007 9:37:06 AM PST by Tarheel (If you can make it there, you can make it anywhere... Rudy--2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Tarheel

I did a report years ago about diethystilbestrol and the fact that daughters of women who take it are often infertile.


16 posted on 01/31/2007 9:45:26 AM PST by Froufrou
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb

I don't support mandatory vaccination against this either, just dissemination of the facts.

Isn't HPV one of those that can make a woman sterile? Years ago a married friend of mine got an STD - from her abusive, philandering husband. She divorced him and sought medical treatment, but was left unable to bear children. Real shame too, she loves children and grieves the loss. For a while she and her second hubby served as foster parents, trying several times to adopt before getting fed up with the heartbreak.


17 posted on 01/31/2007 10:14:46 AM PST by Titan Magroyne ("Y'know, I've always thought of politics as show business for ugly people." Jay Leno:Al Gore 11/29)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb
I don't think the shot should be mandetory, but education about it should be taught in Health class.

Sure, as long as they teach about all other vaccines in health class.

18 posted on 01/31/2007 10:17:03 AM PST by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

And what if, down the road, it turns out it is defective? Who takes responsibility?


19 posted on 01/31/2007 10:39:26 AM PST by Excellence (Vote Dhimmocrat; Submit for Peace! (Bacon bits make great confetti.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Froufrou

I know two women who are DES daughters. Both are infertile. Both have gone through gynecological hell for decades. Now they've been told they are at a greatly increased risk for breast cancer. DES was FDA approved and supposedly completely safe with only minor, if any, side effects. Baloney.

I'm very cynical where these new drugs and vaccines are concerned. I've seen and heard of too many cases where the "cure" was worse than the disease. Whatever happened to, "First, do no harm?"


20 posted on 01/31/2007 2:51:57 PM PST by LadyNavyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson